Comments on: Week in review: Browser battles
Hot on the heels of Microsoft's IE 7, Firefox 2 emerges with a new look and bulked-up security.
Hot on the heels of Microsoft's IE 7, Firefox 2 emerges with a new look and bulked-up security.
January 2, 2010 6:00 AM PST
January 1, 2010 12:16 PM PST
January 1, 2010 9:20 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
firefox takes hell lot of memory and slows the system...which was a problem in the previous releases aslo.Tab feature was initailly adopted and applied by firefox but microsoft has shown better way to hadle it.
http://montoojoshi.googlepages.com/onlinecompiler
http://montoojoshi.googlepages.com/universeunleashed
thanx
there are a million things in firefox better than any ie yet.
I'm running linux on a P3 700mhz laptop with 184ram
using FIREFOX and is only using 19mem and in my winxp machine I am running P4 1.8ghz 512mb of ram (windows automatically use 256mbs min) and firefox is using 25me sooooo firefox is not using alot of memory .
YOU PEOPLE WITH ANY VERSION OF IE GO VISIT A FEW X X X OR WAREZ WEBSITE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO UR PC. and do the same in another pc running firefox :)
is MS ever going to comeout with something unique?
look at vista is a copy of apple os and ppl actually will buy things that have been out for yrs just because is ms hah noob
If IE was a standalone app that people had to purchase it would probably make MS lose more money than the XBox.
Speedwise I find FF2 absolutely trounces IE7 in almost everyway (yes IE7 starts faster but that's it).
Memory wise I just dont know. Can anyone tell me if any or what parts of IE7 are actually preloaded by Windows on system start? I know that Windows Explorer is basically Internet Explorer. So if the OS is already using components of IE when it loads is the memory comparison actually a fair one?
Firefox 2 takes 30-35seconds to load.
Once loaded either browser performs about the same!
What the h*ll hardware are you running...
What the heck hardware are you running that it's taking soooo long. Using Windows I guess it would be a little longer but 30-35seconds to load?
IE 7... well... nothing happens at all.
;-)
Firefox 2.0 is a nice browser, but it's certainly not what it's touted: IE Killer. In going out of their way to praise anything non-Microsoft reviewers have blatantly ignored certain aspects and facts about flaws in the Firefox browser.
1. Firefox is slow. The new Firefox browser actively downloads from links while not in active use...in some attempt to save time. this is done while running in the background, and tends to clog up both the system and your system resources. This is very noticeable while browsing multiple pages.
2. Firefox is a system hog, taking up FAR more system resources than it needs to be. There are fixes (for experts only) that can be done to stop this, but why the product shipped like this is amazing.
3. Firefox has security flaws. Despite the reports that Firefox claims, it does. What's amazing is that Firefox...long claiming the ineptitude of MS's security flaws, hired the woman in charge of their security. Jeez!
4. Firefox doesn't play media very well. Because of the above mentioned issues, using any streaming media in Firefox while browsing causes system problems...especially with flash and such.
comments/questions...
1. Spell check: I know I left Firefox1 long ago in favour of Safari
because of it's lack of in-line spell-check. I thought about
starting to use Firefox2 again now that it finally has this
feature .... only to find out that it doesn't use the system-wide
dictionary!! Does Firefox2 on Windows use the Windows spell-
check? I imagine IE7 would ?? ... Firefox2 has a major
disadvantage here in my eyes because I don't want to have to tell
Firefox2 how to spell my name when every other app on my
system already knows.
2. I'm glad to see that Firefox2 has moved the tab "x"'s from the
side to inside each tab .... I find this much better. Does IE7 do
this?
.3 I just tested playing a YouTube movie and scrolling up and
down at the same time (in Firefox2, Camino and Safari). Firefox
seems to be much choppier and it's not as smooth as the other
browsers. Why? I don't know.
4. I don't know how you do it in Windows, but I Cmd+Click to
open a link in a new tab. This works only partially in Firefox and
it's annoying. For example, in the address or google-bar, if I
type my search and then Cmd+Enter I expect it to open the
search/address in a new tab like every other browser. Firefox2
STILL doesn't do this. To me, these types of problems show me
that Firefox2 still has a very unpolished UI and low quality app.
5. Firefox also doesn't open PDF's in-line. I need a plug-in such
as Adobe Reader just so I can view a PDF!! Come on, this is
2006! I shouldn't be afraid to open a PDF because I have to wait
for a plug-in to load. And then Adobe loads another toolbar so I
have two print icons ... very confusing. Which one do I use? A
good browser shouldn't have to rely on third-party apps to run
properly.
6. I'd like to say that Firefox is great, but I can't. It's just not
polished where it counts. I just hope that your IE7 is better!
exception: I have found a number of sites that do not work well
with Safari. These tend to be optimized for IE (often IE 6), and
since M$ stopped supporting IE for the Mac, these were not
accessible to me (and some of them are important to me, such
as a major airline). Firefox does a credible job of mimicking IE
and allowing me to work on almost every "IE-only" site I have
encoountered. So, I use Safari, except when the site insists that I
use IE; then I use Firefox, which almost always works.
1. Firefox loads up slower
2. Firefox plays videos much,much choppier
3. Firefox doesn't allow auto-PDF play
4. Firefox uses much more system resources
...Firefox isn't a BAD browser by any stretch, but it's just stupid to call it superior to IE 7.0. It's negatives weigh down the positives, and that's just the truth.
1. Firefox loads up slower
2. Firefox plays videos much,much choppier
3. Firefox doesn't allow auto-PDF play
4. Firefox uses much more system resources
5. ALSO...Firefox seems to have trouble with form data. It's as though different filters, etc., are conflicting.
...Firefox isn't a BAD browser by any stretch, but it's just stupid to call it superior to IE 7.0. It's negatives weigh down the positives, and that's just the truth.
It does feel like IE7 loads faster but this only make sense being that it is built into Windows.
I think it is good to use both.
I use both. I think you should use which one you like best. It really does not matter as there is really not much difference at all.
If MS was Google, you know they'd redraft the engine interface somehow to break Firefox. They'd do it in a heartbeat - well, at least until corporate counsel had massaged the story that would be released to the public - and call it innovation.
Dr Schmidt, when dealing with an insensate monster like this, you can't hesitate to take every opportunity to damage its vital organs. You just know the twisted, chair-hurling sociopath that runs their operation wakes up every day quivering with fantasies about destroying Google.
You said everything. Much unlike Microsoft, Firefox Foundation seems to have a free pass from almost all media for any problems their software has and you don't need to go much further than watching the ridiculously biased Cnet comparison between IE7 and FF2.
P.S.: I spell-checked this comment in IE7, as I always do, using ieSpell, a completely free add-on to IE7, but it looks like, for Cnet, add-ins or add-ons just count when it's to say FF also has particular exclusive IE7 features too as long as you install an add-in.
Do let us suppose that it is certain what you say, then it could be due to that (us) pay (economically speaking) an excessive quantity of money for a bad product (IE6-remember that it is part ?irreplaceable of the SO?) that then is improved (IE7) only thanks to the competition of products like Mozilla? And (morally speaking) to be abused, bothered, irritated by monopolist attitudes in prejudice of emergent companies (M$ does it try destroy them, if they threaten him, taking advantage of their dominant position) or insulting attitudes (as WGA)?
Could it be that we simply understand that without Mozilla (or companies similar to it) M $ not merely it would rip us as makes it at the moment but worse, and with bad products additionally (IE6)?
But the funny thing is that objectively speaking; Mozilla is superior than IE and it is FREE.
I understand you if you are employee of M$, in another way I would have to think that you are part of that self-destructing minority.
I don't want them and don't use them untill someone can tell me how to fix them. An as I'm DUMMIE ( push for on-click for off) the fix needs to be very simple ( JUST LIKE ME )
- Fire fox 2 a mess/ IE7 just as bad
- by 2-left-feet October 30, 2006 5:52 AM PST
- FF hits stop and IE7 gives you 403 errors
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(31 Comments)I don't want them and don't use them untill someone can tell me how to fix them. An as I'm DUMMIE ( push for on-click for off) the fix needs to be very simple ( JUST LIKE ME )